Comparative Analysis of Adaptive Sampling Techniques for Data Visualization

and Image Generation

Report for the Visualization & HCI Seminar (July 20, 2023)

1012
Department of Computer Science, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau

Abstract. This seminar report conducts a comparative analysis of two scientific papers that explore novel techniques
in data visualization and image generation. The first paper focuses on adaptive sampling and reconstruction for
volume visualization, presenting a neural rendering pipeline that creates a sparse adaptive sampling structure
and reconstructs high-resolution images. The second paper proposes a dual network architecture for reducing the
number of samples required for rendering. The analysis examines their methodologies, strengths, and limitations,
highlighting their impact on data visualization efficiency and visual quality. The report concludes by discussing the
insights gained and the significance of diverse approaches in advancing data visualization and image generation.

1. Introduction regular sampling methods as used by Weiss et al. [3].

Data visualization plays a key role in making sense of Secondly, computational efficiency is a critical as-
complex data sets and generating meaningful insights. pect, especially in real-time rendering and interactive
Given the ever-increasing volume and complexity of visualization applications. Traditional rendering tech-
data, the challenge is to efficiently present relevant niques may require an excessive number of samples,
information in a visual format. There have been sig- resulting in computational inefficiency and hindering
nificant advances in the field of adaptive sampling in real-time responsiveness. By exploring adaptive sam-
recent years, reducing the number of sample points pling, we seek to identify strategies that can optimize
required for rendering, resulting in greater efficiency the use of samples and efficiently render complex
and better visual quality. scenes in a timely manner.
Traditional rendering and visualization techniques Furthermore, adaptive sampling techniques hold
often rely on fixed or uniform sampling strategies, promise in advancing the state-of-the-art in data vi-
where a fixed number of samples are used to repre- sualization and image generation. Through a com-
sent the visual scene. However, such fixed sampling parative analysis of different adaptive sampling ap-
approaches can lead to either oversampling or un- proaches, we can gain valuable insights into the
dersampling, resulting in suboptimal visual outputs. strengths, limitations, and unique contributions of
This limitation becomes more critical when dealing each technique. Such knowledge will enable re-
with large-scale datasets, as it imposes significant searchers and practitioners to make informed deci-
computational challenges and may hinder real-time sions when selecting sampling strategies based on
rendering capabilities. In light of these challenges, their specific requirements and application domains.
the exploration of adaptive sampling techniques has The purpose of this seminar report is to provide a
gained considerable attention in recent research. comparative analysis of the challenge study "Learn-
Adaptive sampling aims to dynamically adjust the ing Adaptive Sampling and Reconstruction for Volume
sample distribution based on the data characteristics Visualization" and the second selected study "Dual
and visual requirements, optimizing the trade-off be- network architecture for sample reduction". Both arti-
tween computational efficiency and visual fidelity. By cles deal with the area of adaptive sampling, exploring
intelligently allocating samples to regions of inter- new techniques for optimizing sample point selection
est, adaptive sampling can enhance the accuracy and and improving the rendering process. The focus of the
quality of rendered images while reducing the overall assigned paper is to better understand the learning
computational burden. capabilities of neural networks to create visual rep-
The topic of adaptive sampling techniques in data resentations in an unsupervised manner by allowing
visualization and image generation is of paramount the network to learn the associations between specific
importance due to several compelling reasons. Firstly, structures and the creation of such representations
achieving high-quality visual representations is cru- and it could be possible later on to generate data repre-
cial for effectively conveying information and gaining sentations that encode related structures in a compact
insights from complex datasets. Adaptive sampling and easy-to-use way to visualize data through neural
offers the potential to improve the visual fidelity of networks.[1] It introduces a unique neural rendering
rendered images, capturing important features and pipeline that generates a sparse adaptive sampling
details that may be overlooked by traditional fixed structure from a low resolution input image and re-

1
 Figure 1: Overview of network-based adaptive sampling. [1]

Figure 2: Overview of AdaNeRF [2]

constructs a high resolution image from this sparse pact on improving data visualization efficiency and
set of samples. The authors propose a differentiable visual quality. The rest of this seminar report is or-
sampling and reconstruction stage that allows shared ganized as follows: Section 2 provides an overview
learning of the structures associated with the final of the methods I used to approach this comparative
visual representation and reconstruction of the repre- analysis. Section 3 describes the comparative results
sentation. This article demonstrates the effectiveness and findings of my literature review and Section 4 dis-
of their approach to volume visualization, including cusses the broad impact of these approaches in the
isosurfaces and Direct Volume Rendering. field of data visualization.
In contrast, the second paper, "Dual Network Ar- Through this comparative analysis, we aim to gain
chitecture for Sample Reduction", addresses the chal- greater insight into advances in adaptive sampling
lenge to reduce the number of sample points required and sample reduction techniques, thereby contribut-
for rendering with the use of a dual network archi- ing to the ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency
tecture . The authors propose sampling and shading and visual fidelity of data visualization.
networks that are trained together to optimize the re-
quired number of samples. Their training scheme in- 2. Methods
volves fixed sample positions along each ray and grad- In this section, the methodology employed to conduct
ually introduces sparsity during training to achieve the comparative analysis between the assigned paper
high-quality results even with a small number of sam- and second paper is described. The methods section
ples. The resulting compact neural representation outlines the steps taken to evaluate and compare the
can be rendered in real-time, outperforming previ- approaches presented in both papers.
ous compact neural representations and achieving
high-quality representations.[2]
2.1 Comparison Criteria
By examining these two studies side by side, the aim
was to compare and contrast their methods, strengths, In this section, we will compare and evaluate the se-
and limitations in terms of adaptive sampling and lected papers based on the following criteria: sam-
sample reduction. In addition, potential synergies pling method, training methods and loss function,
are explored between these approaches and their im- and evaluation metrics. These criteria are crucial in

2
understanding the effectiveness and performance of what is seen through the pixels at determined sam-
the proposed approaches. The sampling method cri- ple locations. High-resolution target images are pre-
terion examines how each paper addresses the chal- computed and the sampling process becomes a selec-
lenge of determining where to sample data and gen- tion of pixels from these images. The sampling func-
erate images with relevant information. The training tion is made differentiable using a smooth sigmoid
methods and loss function criterion explores the tech- function. A steepness parameter is used to control the
niques employed by each paper to train their models degree of smoothness and a value of around 50 always
effectively and assesses the objective functions used leads to the best results [1]. The reconstruction func-
to guide the learning process and optimize the mod- tion NR needs to estimate undefined pixel values for
els’ performance. Lastly, the evaluation metrics cri- high-resolution output image O from sparse samples
terion focuses on the metrics utilized to assess the S. A differentiable inpainting method with a residual
quality and accuracy of the generated images. By ex- neural network is proposed to improve reconstruction
amining these criteria, we can gain insights into the quality since network-based inpainting at a sparsity
similarities and differences between the two papers, level used in application leads to low reconstruction
allowing for a comprehensive comparative analysis of quality while classical non-network-based inpaint-
their respective methodologies. ing methods are not easily differentiable with respect
to the sampling mask. The proposed pull-push algo-
3. Comparative Analysis rithm is differentiable with respect to changes in the
pixel data and sampling mask, and combines differ-
This chapter provides a detailed discussion of the se-
entiable inpainting with a residual neural network
lected comparison criteria and delves deeper into the
for improved reconstruction. A fully convolutional
comparative analysis between the two papers.
network is used to improve reconstruction by model-
ing the relationship between the inpainting result and
3.1 Sampling Methods ground truth using EnhanceNet as a base architecture.
This section focuses on the sampling methods utilized [1]
in the two selected papers. Sampling methods deter-
mine how data samples are selected and positioned for 3.1.2 Kurz et al. [2]
effective visualization and image generation. By com-
paring the sampling techniques employed in each pa- AdaNeRF is a fully end-to-end trainable pipeline for
per, we aim to understand their approaches and assess real-time rendering. Coarse network of original NeRF
their effectiveness in capturing important data fea- is replaced by a sampling network that is only evalu-
tures. This analysis will highlight the strengths, limi- ated once per ray. Sampling network takes ray origin
tations, and potential applications of each method. and direction as input and outputs a vector of pre-
dictions whereas a shading network uses predicted
3.1.1 Weiss et al. [1] importance of samples to encode their position and
output density and color. Use of sampling network
The importance network determines the distribu- once allows for culling of low contribution samples,
tion of samples needed for visual output generation. increasing efficiency [2]. Dual-network setup shown
Deeming every pixel equally important results in a in Figure 1. A proposed formulation involves mul-
uniform sample distribution. Screen space gradients tiplying predicted per-sample densities of sampling
of individual channels can also be used for sample network and shading network. Fixed sample locations
distribution with weighted contributions. Other mea- along each ray are used, with one sample in the cen-
sures include screen space curvature and color con- ter of each cell when discretizing the space. Ground
trast. A fully convolutional neural network predicts a truth depth is not required and separate training steps
high-resolution importance map from low-resolution are avoided. Standard ray accumulation function is
rendering without heuristic pixel importance deci- modified to include an additional multiplication by
sions and is trained end-to-end with losses on recon- the outputs of the sampling network. Introduction
structed color information for superior prediction of of this multiplication allows the sampling network to
important regions in the final image.Figure (1) shows directly increase or decrease the importance of sam-
the network based adaptive sampling pipeline. [1] ples and receive gradients from the MSE color recon-
Two main classes of algorithms used in rendering are struction loss [2]. Figure (2) shows the dual network
stippling and importance sampling. These algorithms architecture of AdaNerf.
are not easily differentiable and often too slow for
real-time applications. Hence a new sampling strat- 3.1.3 Key Takeaways
egy is proposed that computes the chance of each
pixel being sampled using a smooth approximation of In the pursuit of enhancing efficiency and accuracy in
rejection sampling. The importance map is first nor- data visualization and image generation, two innova-
malized to have a prescribed mean and minimal value. tive approaches have been proposed by Weiss et al. [1]
A sampling pattern is generated using a permutation and AdaNeRF [2]. While both methods share the com-
of numbers. Ray-casting is then used to compute mon goal of optimizing the sampling process, they

3
employ distinct strategies to achieve this objective. 5-6 days [1]. The proposed sampling pipeline consists
Weiss et al. [1] introduces the concept of an im- of two trainable blocks: the importance network N I
portance network, which plays a pivotal role in pre- and the reconstruction network N R. Both networks
dicting a high-resolution importance map based on use 3x3 convolutions with zero-padding and a stride
low-resolution renderings. This innovative technique of one. The importance network takes as input an im-
allows for the selective sampling of important regions, portance map computed using screen space gradient
thereby reducing the overall number of low contri- magnitudes and learns to improve it. The importance
bution samples. In contrast, AdaNeRF [2] adopts a network performs 4x-upscaling of a low-resolution
unique dual-network setup, comprising a sampling input image with 1/8 the resolution of the final im-
network and a shading network. This setup collabora- age. This allows for the reduction of initially required
tively addresses the reconstruction process, enabling samples. The reconstruction network N R estimates
the identification and culling of low contribution sam- the mask, normal, and depth values at all pixels. A
ples for improved efficiency. modified EnhanceNet shows superior reconstruction
In the pursuit of high-quality image reconstruction, results compared to alternative architectures such as
Weiss et al. [1] introduces a novel differentiable in- the U-Net. Inpainting is performed first before pass-
painting method that leverages a residual neural net- ing the result to a network that uses a residual connec-
work. By seamlessly integrating this approach into the tion to learn the differences between this result and
reconstruction pipeline, the authors achieve superior the ground truth which showed improved reconstruc-
reconstruction results. On the other hand, AdaNeRF tion quality. The sample mask is also passed to the
[2] enhances the reconstruction process by combin- network as a per-sample measure of certainty. The
ing the sampling network’s outputs with the shading mask and depth values are clamped to [0,1], and the
network’s density predictions, effectively capitalizing normals are scaled to unit length before shading is
on their synergistic potential. applied [1]. Regular vector norms used as primary
loss functions between network prediction and tar-
3.2 Training Methods and Loss Function get image. L1 norm used instead of L2 norm to avoid
smoothing out resulting images. No additional per-
This section delves into the training methods and loss ceptual losses employed due to less effectiveness for
functions employed in the two selected papers. Train- isosurface upsampling tasks. Mask channel used to
ing methods involve the techniques and strategies indicate whether or not a ray hits the isosurface and
used to optimize the models and enhance their per- perform hard selection between reconstructed color
formance, while the choice of loss function guides values and background. Mask values must be contin-
the learning process by quantifying the discrepancy uous, but undesirable blurring were observed when
between predicted and target outputs. By comparing using sigmoidal mapping. Two losses added to regu-
the training methods and loss functions utilized in lar L1 loss on mask to produce sharp masks close to
each paper, the aim is to evaluate their effectiveness either zero or one - binary cross entropy (BCE) loss
in achieving the desired objectives. Understanding and bounds loss. Prior loss on importance map used
the approaches employed by the authors to train their to enforce mean is equal to one before normalization
models and the specific loss functions employed pro- step. Final loss function is a weighted sum of indi-
vides insights into the robustness and adaptability vidual loss terms over all channels - weights of 5 for
of their methodologies. Through this analysis, as- mask and BCE, 0.01 for bounds, 50 for normal map,
sessment of the strengths, limitations, and potential and 5 for depth map, with a weight of 0.1 for the im-
applications of each training method and loss func- portance map prior. Deviations from these weights
tion in the context of the respective papers. quickly worsen reconstruction quality significantly
[1].
3.2.1 Weiss et al. [1] Dataset: Ejecta dataset
3.2.2 Kurz et al. [2] Dataset: DONeRF dataset,
In order to train their network, they used 5,000 im- LLFF dataset
ages of isosurfaces from Ejecta dataset ,a supernova
simulation, were generated through GPU ray-casting. AdaNeRF takes a differnet approach where it disen-
Images were at a resolution of 512*512 and rendered tangles δ from the shading network density by intro-
from random camera positions. Surfaces were resam- ducing sparsity. The shading network is trained via
pled to Cartesian grids with a resolution of 2563 and a standard MSE (Mean Square Error) loss while the
5123 . Normals at surface points were used to compute sampling network loss is composed of a sparsity loss
colors via Phong illumination model. About 20,000 and an additional density multiplication term. AdaN-
random crops of size 2562 were taken from the image eRF uses a soft student-teacher regularization train-
set and split between training (80%) and validation ing scheme with 4 phases: The first phase (Density
(20%). Mean importance value for training was set to training) establishes the teacher and uses a L1-loss
10%. Adam optimizer with a learning rate of 10− 4 was to encourage the output predictions towards 1. While
used for training. Networks were trained on a single the second phase (Sparsification) introduces an addi-
GeForce GTX 1080 for 300 to 500 epochs in around tional L1-loss to the sampling network that forces the

4
majority of predictions towards 0. The sparsification 3.3 Evaluation Metrics
phase gradually increases the sparsity of the sampling
This section focuses on the evaluation metrics used in
network resulting in fewer significant outputs. The
the two selected papers to assess the performance and
third phase (Sparse training) locks the sampling net-
quality of their proposed methods. Evaluation met-
work’s weights while the shading network is now free
rics provide quantitative measures to gauge the effec-
to alter the output. The shading network takes advan-
tiveness, accuracy, and efficiency of the implemented
tage of the sparsified sampling network. The fourth
approaches. By examining the evaluation metrics em-
phase (Fine-tuning) increases quality as it completely
ployed in each paper, the aim is to understand how the
removes samples that hardly contribute to the final
authors validated their results and compared them
output and allows the shading network to focus on
to existing benchmarks. This analysis allows us to
the contributing samples only. Real-time rendering
evaluate the reliability and comprehensiveness of the
was found to improve performance with variable sam-
experimental evaluations conducted in the respective
ple counts per ray. Adaptive sampling scheme uses
papers. By scrutinizing the chosen evaluation metrics,
fixed sample locations and a threshold τ for sampling
we can gain insights into the strengths, limitations,
network predictions. Efficiency is increased by saving
and applicability of each metric in assessing the per-
shading network evaluations in regions that don’t re-
formance of the proposed methods.
quire many samples. Maximum number of allowed
samples is limited to Nmax. Several cases are distin-
guished depending on the number of sampling net- 3.3.1 Weiss et al. [1]
work predictions that exceed the threshold. Adaptive Network-based reconstruction quality assessed using
sampling scheme can be efficiently implemented on three image quality metrics:
GPUs using warp communication primitives. This ap-
proach relies on volume integration and can go down • Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR) based on L2
to a single sample per ray and supports variable sam- loss.
ple counts per ray without a spatial data structure
• Structural Similarity Index (SSIM) measures per-
[2].
ceived quality using pixel blocks.
• Learned Perceptual Image Patch Similarity
3.2.3 Key Takeaways (LPIPS) predicts human perception of image sim-
Both Weiss et al. and AdaNeRF adopt end-to-end ilarity.
trainable network architectures to achieve their re- Lower LPIPS score is better, while higher PSNR and
spective objectives. SSIM scores indicate higher quality. 1-LPIPS shown
In Weiss et al.’s approach, an end-to-end training in statistics for better comparison [1]. Statistics were
methodology is employed for both the importance computed on a validation dataset using 20000 novel
network and reconstruction network. These networks views of Ejecta at the resolution of 5122 . The impor-
utilize 3x3 convolutions and a modified EnhanceNet tance map was normalized to have a minimum value
architecture, ensuring seamless integration of infor- of 0.002 and a mean value of 0.05. Plastic sampling
mation for improved performance. was used in the sampling stage as it produced superior
On the other hand, AdaNeRF employs a distinct results during experiments compared to alternative
soft student-teacher regularization training scheme, methods. Steepness of the sampling function was
structured into four phases. This approach facilitates determined by the parameter "α" in equation (1).
the comprehensive training of the sampling network 
 1
and shading network, leading to enhanced perfor- ′
Si,j = sig α Ii,j − Pi,j Ti,j , sig(x) :=
mance. 1 + e−x
Weiss et al. incorporates regular vector norms as (1)
primary loss functions, with a preference for L1 norm A value of α = 50 was used in all experiments. In
over L2 norm to preserve the sharpness of the result- terms of reconstruction, the pull-push algorithm pro-
ing images. Additionally, to further refine the results, vided a good initial guess compared to network-based
the authors introduce additional losses such as binary approaches. The best reconstruction was achieved
cross entropy (BCE) loss and bounds loss. Further- using both pull-push-based inpainting and residual
more, a prior loss is included for the importance map, network connections. Screen space gradient magni-
contributing to the overall optimization process. tudes hinted at important sampling regions and sig-
In contrast, AdaNeRF leverages the Mean Square nificantly outperformed a constant importance map.
Error (MSE) loss for the shading network, while intro- The best results were achieved by combining network-
ducing a combination of sparsity loss and density mul- based importance learning and screen space gradient
tiplication term for the sampling network. These loss magnitudes via a residual network connection for ac-
components contribute to the overall optimization curate reconstruction [1]. The proposed sampling
process, effectively training the network for improved pipeline’s convergence is analyzed with an increas-
performance and efficiency. ing number of samples. The network is trained with

5
10% of the samples but during inference, the available systematically evaluating the importance and effec-
number of samples varies. The SSIM and LPIPS scores tiveness of each aspect of their approach, the authors
converge against their optima with an increasing num- gained valuable insights into the individual contribu-
ber of samples. The reconstruction is very close to tions of different components. This rigorous analysis
the target after taking 20 to 30% of samples. Adaptive helped them ascertain the impact of specific elements
sampling is compared to fixed regular sampling us- on the overall performance, thereby validating their
ing a 4x-upsampling network. The adaptive pipeline method’s robustness and potential to improve data
using a constant importance map performs equally visualization and image generation.
well as the 4x-upsampling network. The reconstruc-
tion quality is significantly increased when adaptive 4. Results
sampling is used according to the inferred importance
In the Results section, we present the findings and
map[1]. Good generalization observed, outperform-
outcomes derived from the experimental analysis con-
ing baseline method using gradient magnitude-based
ducted in this study. This section offers a thorough
importance mapping and pull-push-based inpainting.
overview and analysis of the results obtained through
Tighter spread of quantitative measures in general, in-
the implementation and evaluation of the method-
dicating less significant outliers in the reconstructed
ologies discussed earlier. By conducting meticulous
values. Inaccuracies observed in depth maps recon-
experiments and analyzing the collected data, our aim
structed from sparse samples of RM and Skull, but do
is to provide a concise and comprehensive summary
not affect quality of reconstructed color images. Other
of the achieved outcomes in relation to the defined re-
inpainting algorithms such as PDE-based methods an-
search objectives and questions. The Results section
alyzed, but not differentiable and cannot be used for
holds significant importance in this report as it offers
end-to-end training in combination with importance
empirical evidence and valuable insights, contribut-
network. Network pipeline can reconstruct images at
ing to a deeper comprehension of the effectiveness
high fidelity from only 5 percent of the samples used
and performance of the investigated approaches.
to render the data sets at full pixel resolution. Sharp
edges were well preserved due to learned increase in
sample density [1]. 4.1 Weiss et al. [1]
Proposed network pipeline is for Direct Volume Ren-
3.3.2 Kurz et al. [2] dering (DVR). It renders many sample points along
the rays using alpha-compositing For the training
A 4-phase training scheme and adaptive sampling and validation importance and reconstruction net-
strategy are validated in an ablation study. Small- works receive RGBa images and output reconstructed
scale experiments determined the number of itera- images. Gradients at sample points along view rays
tions per phase, which can be further optimized for increase quality when used in networks. Normalized
speed or quality. Skipping the dense training or sparsi- gradients along a single ray are treated as emission
fication results in minor quality degradation. Remov- and blended. Gradient map serves as additional coher-
ing density multiplication in the ray accumulation ence indicator. Training and validation uses random
function causes the sampling network to collapse. Us- transfer functions (TFs) on Ejecta with L1 and LPIPS-
ing only ’L1-loss’ supervision signal or removing shad- based losses. Reconstruction quality depends on the
ing density supervision ’L1-term’ leads to degradation use of TFs with broad range of colors in training [1].
of sampling network quality. Directly fine-tuning af- Fig. 3 shows qualitative analysis of results for new
ter sparsification shows a reduction in quality. The data sets using importance sampling and reconstruc-
adaptive variant is more efficient and can outperform tion with DVR, SSIM, and LPIPS statistics. Network
the quality of fixed samples at just 7.76 samples [2]. pipeline generalizes well to new volumes and TFs,
but color variations affect reconstruction quality. Re-
3.3.3 Key Takeaways construction quality is affected by color variations,
especially in areas with small-scale color changes. Re-
Both Weiss et al. and AdaNeRF conducted thorough construction problem is more challenging when using
validation studies to assess the efficacy of their pro- DVR samples compared to isosurface samples. Isosur-
posed methodologies. face shading is smooth, making it easy for network to
In Weiss et al.’s work, a comprehensive compari- focus on silhouettes and internal edges, while DVR
son was made against existing methods in the field of requires learning both shape and color texture from
data visualization and image generation. The authors the TF [1].
validated their approach by rigorously evaluating its
performance in comparison to other established tech-
4.2 Kurz et al. [2]
niques. This allowed them to demonstrate the su-
periority of their proposed method and its ability to AdaNeRF is evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively
address specific challenges in the domain. on various datasets against several baseline meth-
On the other hand, AdaNeRF employed an abla- ods. PSNR (Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio) is used to
tion study to validate their proposed technique. By measure image quality and the number of parameters

6
Figure 3: Visual comparisons of adaptive sampling for DVR are shown for different datasets. Each row displays
the importance map, sparse samples, network output, and ground truth. [1]

7
required is used to evaluate compactness. Real-time ness compared to AdaNerf [2]. On the other hand,
rendering timings are measured via TensorRT and AdaNerf did not optimize for camera parameters, mak-
CUDA. Datasets evaluated include DONeRF and LLFF, ing it susceptible to variations in input data consis-
both containing synthetic indoor/outdoor scenes and tency, resulting in fluctuations in camera settings or
real-world scenes respectively. Baselines compared lighting conditions that can adversely impact the gen-
to AdaNeRF include NeRF, DONeRF, TermiNeRF, Au- erated image quality.
toInt, Plenoxels, and Instant-NGP. AdaNeRF achieves The adaptive sampling network pipeline presented
equal or better image quality than Plenoxels but at in the first paper offers a superior sampling outcome
48-215x less memory. AdaNeRF outperforms TermiN- and improves the overall image generation process.
eRF* at less than half the sample count and frame Furthermore, the parameter tuning and weight dis-
time. AdaNeRF shows state-of-the-art image quality tribution in AdaNerf were comparatively inferior to
with equal or better run-time performance and mem- the approach proposed by Weiss et al. [1]. However,
ory footprint without requiring explicit data struc- it is worth noting that AdaNerf excelled in color re-
tures. Real-time rendering performance is evalu- production, an aspect where the first paper exhibited
ated through AdaNeRF TensorRT and CUDA proto- certain limitations. AdaNeRF’s exceptional perfor-
type against all baselines, with Plenoxels being the mance in terms of image quality, memory usage, and
exception where the authors’ implementation is used. rendering speed establishes it as a leading adaptive
AdaNeRF shows the best tradeoff between fast ren- sampling approach. The combination of these results
dering and competitive quality or high-quality and 2x advances the field and provides researchers with po-
speed improvement over DONeRF and TermiNeRF. tential avenues for enhancing data visualization and
image generation methodologies.
4.2.1 Key Takeaways Ultimately, the adaptive sampling technique intro-
duced by Weiss et al. [1] demonstrates a robust and
Weiss et al.’s network pipeline presents promising re- efficient approach to improve image reconstruction
sults for Direct Volume Rendering (DVR), with a focus without relying on explicit feature descriptors. The
on isosurface reconstruction. However, the impact advantages of this method over AdaNerf [2], which
of color variations on reconstruction quality poses lacks camera parameter optimization, highlight the
a challenge that needs to be addressed. The choice potential significance of different adaptive sampling
of transfer functions during training significantly in- strategies using neural networks in data visualiza-
fluences the network’s performance, indicating the tion and image generation. The findings from this
importance of carefully selecting training data to comparative analysis contribute valuable insights to
achieve optimal results. Despite these challenges, the advance the field and encourage further exploration
network demonstrates good generalization capabili- of adaptive sampling techniques for enhanced visual
ties across different volumes and transfer functions, representation.
which highlights its potential for real-world applica-
tions. 6. Conclusion
On the other hand, AdaNeRF showcases impressive In conclusion, this report has presented a comprehen-
performance across multiple metrics. It outperforms sive comparative analysis of two scientific papers that
various baseline methods in terms of image quality, explore innovative approaches in data visualization
memory usage, and rendering speed. The adaptive and image generation. The analysis focused on key
sampling technique enables real-time rendering capa- aspects, including sampling methods, training tech-
bilities without compromising on image quality, mak- niques, loss functions, and evaluation metrics, which
ing it a promising solution for data visualization and provided valuable insights into the strengths, limita-
image generation tasks. AdaNeRF’s ability to achieve tions, and distinctive contributions of each paper.
high-quality results with significantly reduced mem-
Weiss et al. proposed an importance network to
ory requirements sets it apart from other methods
predict high-resolution importance maps from low-
and positions it as a strong candidate for efficient and
resolution rendering, while AdaNeRF introduced a
effective adaptive sampling.
novel dual-network setup comprising a sampling net-
work and a shading network. Both papers shared a
5. Discussion common goal of improving efficiency by selectively
The present study aimed to compare the adaptive sam- sampling crucial regions and reducing the number of
pling approach introduced by Weiss et al. [1] with low contribution samples.
the method employed by Kurz et al. [2] in terms of The investigation of sampling methods in the ana-
their robustness and effectiveness in improving the lyzed papers showcased the authors’ novel approaches
image generation process. The results of the analysis in selecting and positioning data samples to encode
showed that Weiss et al.’s technique, which learns to relevant information effectively. The evaluation of
identify important sampling locations and enhances training methods and loss functions shed light on the
the reconstruction quality without the need for ex- strategies employed to optimize models and guide the
plicit feature descriptors, exhibited greater robust- learning process, providing critical details for future

8
research in this domain. visualization and image generation.
Weiss et al.’s paper demonstrated promising results Overall, the comparative analysis has highlighted
in Direct Volume Rendering (DVR), with an emphasis the importance of exploring diverse approaches in
on isosurface reconstruction. However, the impact addressing complex challenges in data visualization.
of color variations on reconstruction quality poses a Each paper presented unique insights and innova-
challenge that requires further attention. The choice tive methodologies that have the potential to inspire
of transfer functions during training significantly in- further advancements in various domains. It is essen-
fluenced the network’s performance, highlighting the tial to recognize the significant contributions made
importance of carefully selecting training data for by both papers, pushing the boundaries of data vi-
optimal results. Nonetheless, the network exhibited sualization and image generation, and opening new
good generalization capabilities across different vol- possibilities for future research in this dynamic field.
umes and transfer functions, indicating its potential
for real-world applications. 7. References
In contrast, AdaNeRF showcased impressive per-
formance across multiple metrics. It outperformed [1] Weiss, S., IşIk, M., Thies, J., & Westermann, R.
various baseline methods in terms of image quality, (2020). Learning adaptive sampling and reconstruc-
memory usage, and rendering speed. The adaptive tion for volume visualization. IEEE Transactions on
sampling technique enabled real-time rendering capa- Visualization and Computer Graphics, 28(7), 2654-
bilities without compromising image quality, making 2667.
it a promising solution for data visualization and im- [2] Kurz, A., Neff, T., Lv, Z., Zollhöfer, M., & Stein-
age generation tasks. AdaNeRF’s ability to achieve berger, M. (2022, October). AdaNeRF: Adaptive Sam-
high-quality results with significantly reduced mem- pling for Real-Time Rendering of Neural Radiance
ory requirements sets it apart from other methods Fields. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2022: 17th Eu-
and positions it as a strong candidate for efficient and ropean Conference, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 23–27,
effective adaptive sampling. 2022, Proceedings, Part XVII (pp. 254-270). Cham:
By combining the findings from both papers, we Springer Nature Switzerland.
have gained a deeper understanding of the methodolo- [3] S. Weiss, M. Chu, N. Thuerey, and R. Wester-
gies and techniques employed in the field of adaptive mann, “Volumetric isosurface rendering with deep
sampling. This report serves as a stepping stone for fu- learning-based super-resolution,” IEEE Trans. Vis.
ture research endeavors, encouraging the exploration Comput. Graphics, to be published, doi: 10.1109/
of new avenues and methodologies for enhanced data TVCG.2019.2956697.